保留皮肤的青年乳腺癌改良根治术后即刻乳房再造与改良根治术的比较分析

目的:比较保留皮肤的乳腺癌改良根治术后即刻乳房再造与改良根治术对青年患者的疗效,并对乳房再造患者的预后因素进行分析。方法:回顾性分析柳州市人民医院2008年7 月至2014年6 月收治并行保留皮肤的乳腺癌改良根治术后即刻乳房再造组（60例）与改良根治术组（68例）的青年乳腺癌患者临床病理资料,比较两组间局部复发、无瘤生存及总生存,并分析年龄、肿瘤大小、是否保留乳头乳晕等因素对乳房再造患者生存的影响。结果:所有病例随访15～88个月,中位时间51个月。即刻乳房再造组局部复发3 例,远处转移8 例,死亡5 例,3 年无瘤生存率91.7% ,5 年无瘤生存率81.7% ,总生存率91.7%;改良根治术组局部复发2 例,远处转移9 例,死亡5 例,3 年无瘤生存率94.1 % ,5 年无瘤生存率83.8% ,总生存率92.6% ,两组比较均差异无统计学意义（均P > 0.05）。 即刻乳房再造组患者预后分析显示,淋巴结转移及雌孕激素受体阴性与无瘤生存率、总生存率相关（均P <0.05）。 结论:青年乳腺癌患者保留皮肤的改良根治术后即刻乳房再造组与改良根治术组在局部复发及远期生存方面无显著性差异,对于早期青年乳腺癌患者是安全的,保留乳头乳晕并未增加肿瘤复发风险,淋巴结转移及雌孕激素受体阴性是影响预后的主要因素。      

88例早期乳腺癌术后胸壁复发的多因素分析

目的 探讨影响早期乳腺癌根治术和改良根治术后胸壁复发及其预后的相关因素.方法 对本院1995～2005年收治的88例早期乳腺癌术后胸壁复发患者进行回顾性分析.其中Ⅰ期12例,Ⅱa期33例,Ⅱb期43例（不包括T3N0M0和T1N1M0、T2N1M0中淋巴结阳性4个以上者）,术后均未接受胸壁放疗,复发后均采用以局部放疗和全身化疗为主的综合治疗.结果 中位发病年龄为47岁,中位复发年龄为49岁,中位复发时间为24个月,中位生存时间为59.5个月.总的5、10年生存率为85.5%、44.9%.3、5年无瘤生存率为36.6%、21.2%.复发后的3、5年生存率为59.6%、41.8%.行根治术者胸壁复发时间显著长于行改良根治术者（P＜0.002）;术后行化疗者胸壁复发时间显著长于术后未行化疗者（P＜0.002）;术后行内分泌治疗者胸壁复发时间显著长于术后未行内分泌治疗者（P＜0.032）.单纯胸壁复发者生存率显著高于伴有区域性淋巴结转移或远处转移者（P＜0.02）;2年以上复发者生存率显著高于2年以内复发者（P＜0.003）;ER（＋）者生存率显著高于ER（-）者（P＜0.026）.结论 手术方式、术后有无全身化疗及内分泌治疗是影响早期乳腺癌术后胸壁复发的相关因素.术后胸壁复发时间、有无出现区域性淋巴结转移或远处转移、ER表达情况等是影响早期乳腺癌胸壁复发后预后的相关因素.     

腋窝淋巴结1～3个转移的乳腺癌根治术后辅助放疗指征探讨

目的 回顾分析412例腋窝淋巴结1～3个转移的乳腺癌根治术后患者的预后因素,探讨术后辅助放疗的指征.方法 用Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率,用Logrank法和Cox模型分别进行单因素和多因素预后分析,分析影响局部复发和远处转移的预后因素.结果 随访率为98.7%.随访满5、10年者分别为215、41例.5、10年总生存率分别为90.0%、81.3%.无、有局部复发的5年总生存率分别为92.9%、69.9%(x2=20.79,P=0.000).5、10年局部复发±远处转移率分别为10.7%、18.6%.多因素分析显示T2期,≥2个腋窝淋巴结转移,雌、孕激素受体均阴性为影响局部复发的预后因素.含0～1、2～3个预后因素的10年局部复发率分别为3.9%、36.9%(x2=20.64,P=0.000).多因素分析显示局部复发、阳性淋巴结转移率＞25%为影响远处转移的预后因素,无、有局部复发的5年远处转移率分别为9.7%、36.6%(x2=16.34,P=0.000).结论 对腋窝淋巴结1～3个转移的乳腺癌根治术后患者且含2～3个影响局部复发的预后因素者建议行术后辅助放疗.     

早期乳腺癌保乳手术的预后价值评价

目的探讨早期乳腺癌保乳手术的预后效果以及影响术后生存率的相关因素。方法回顾性分析240例行早期乳腺癌保乳手术治疗的患者的临床资料,记录患者局部复发情况、远处转移情况以及5年生存情况,分析影响患者生存率的相关因素。结果本组240例患者5例死亡,均为肿瘤相关性死亡,中位生存时间为64个月,局部复发6例,远处转移9例,3年生存率为99.17%,5年生存率为97.92%。病理分期、腋淋巴结转移数、组织学分级、切缘状态以及术后有无放疗均为影响患者生存率的主要因素(P<0.05);组织学分级及术后有无放疗是影响患者生存率的独立预后因素(P<0.05)。结论早期乳腺癌患者行保乳手术复发率和转移率低,远期生存率高,但需注意保证切缘阴性,术后进行辅助放疗是提高远期生存率的关键。     

早期乳腺癌患者行乳腺癌根治术和保乳术后放疗的生存比较

目的 探讨乳腺癌根治术和保乳术后放疗对早期乳腺癌患者生存情况的影响.方法 选择早期乳腺癌379例,分为根治术组(341例)和保乳术后放疗组(38例).分别观察两组患者的Karnofsky评分和复发情况.结果 随访5年时保乳术后放疗组患者Karnofsky评分显著高于根治术组(P＜0.05);保乳术后放疗组患者1、3、5...     

35岁以下乳腺癌患者保乳术与改良根治术比较及保乳术预后因素观察

目的:比较年轻乳腺癌患者（年龄≤35岁）保乳手术及改良根治术后疗效,并对保乳手术的患者进行预后相关因素分析。方法:回顾性分析1995年1 月至2006年12月天津医科大学附属肿瘤医院收治并分别实施保乳手术（71例）及改良根治术（70例）的年轻乳腺癌患者临床病理资料,比较两组的局部复发及生存情况,并分析年龄、肿瘤大小、淋巴结情况、组织学分级等因素对保乳患者生存情况的影响。结果:所有患者随访时间12～156 个月,中位时间56个月。保乳组:局部复发5 例,远处转移8 例,死亡7 例;3 年无瘤生存率94.4% ,5 年无瘤生存率78.9% ,总生存率90.1% 。改良组:局部复发3 例,远处转移6 例,死亡5 例;3 年无瘤生存率95.7% ,5 年无瘤生存率82.9% ,总生存率92.9% ;且对两组进行比较后均无显著性差异（P 均>0.05）。 对保乳组患者进行预后相关因素分析,切缘阳性与局部控制率、无瘤生存率、总生存率相关（P 均<0.05）;淋巴结转移与无瘤生存率、总生存率相关（P均<0.05）。结论:年轻乳腺癌患者的保乳手术与改良根治手术在局部复发及远期生存等方面无显著性差异,尤其是对于早期年轻乳腺癌患者,保乳手术是安全的,且局部控制尚满意,切缘阳性、淋巴结转移是影响预后的主要因素。      

乳腺癌术后局部复发因素的临床分析

目的探讨乳腺癌术后局部复发的影响因素.方法自1997年1月至2001年1月我院共收治乳腺癌患者435例.观察肿瘤自身因素和治疗因素对术后复发的影响.结果 3年复发率6.4%,总复发率7.0%.肿瘤自身因素中,患者年龄和是否绝经、病理类型和激素受体情况、原发肿瘤大小和腋窝淋巴结转移数目对术后局部复发有显著影响,而患者性别和是否有肿瘤家族史对术后局部复发无显著影响.治疗因素中,术后辅助放疗对减少局部复发有一定作用,而保乳术后局部复发率高于根治术和改良根治术.结论早期诊断、早期治疗是减少乳腺癌复发转移的有效途径,加强辅助治疗可以减少和延缓术后局部复发.     

Postmastectomy hypofractionation radiotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients: A phase Ⅰ/Ⅱ clinical trial

目的 探讨乳腺癌改良根治术后大分割放疗的近期疗效和副反应.方法 38例高危乳腺癌患者改良根治术后化疗后,同侧胸壁和锁骨上下放疗43.5 Gy分15次3周完成,观察急性放疗反应发生率和肿瘤的局部区域控制率.结果 中位随访13个月,入组38例患者全部生存,无照射野内复发,远处转移率为13%(5例).5例患者出现3级放射性皮炎,均发生在放疗结束后2～3周.3例患者出现2级放射性肺炎.结论 乳腺癌改良根治术后43.5 Gy分15次3周完成的大分割放疗方案的急性副反应可以接受,近期疗效较好.     

Postmastectomy hypofractionation radiotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients: A phase Ⅰ/Ⅱ clinical trial

目的 探讨乳腺癌改良根治术后大分割放疗的近期疗效和副反应.方法 38例高危乳腺癌患者改良根治术后化疗后,同侧胸壁和锁骨上下放疗43.5 Gy分15次3周完成,观察急性放疗反应发生率和肿瘤的局部区域控制率.结果 中位随访13个月,入组38例患者全部生存,无照射野内复发,远处转移率为13%(5例).5例患者出现3级放射性皮炎,均发生在放疗结束后2～3周.3例患者出现2级放射性肺炎.结论 乳腺癌改良根治术后43.5 Gy分15次3周完成的大分割放疗方案的急性副反应可以接受,近期疗效较好.     

Postmastectomy hypofractionation radiotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients: A phase Ⅰ/Ⅱ clinical trial

目的 探讨乳腺癌改良根治术后大分割放疗的近期疗效和副反应.方法 38例高危乳腺癌患者改良根治术后化疗后,同侧胸壁和锁骨上下放疗43.5 Gy分15次3周完成,观察急性放疗反应发生率和肿瘤的局部区域控制率.结果 中位随访13个月,入组38例患者全部生存,无照射野内复发,远处转移率为13%(5例).5例患者出现3级放射性皮炎,均发生在放疗结束后2～3周.3例患者出现2级放射性肺炎.结论 乳腺癌改良根治术后43.5 Gy分15次3周完成的大分割放疗方案的急性副反应可以接受,近期疗效较好.     

A systematic overview of radiation therapy effects in breast cancer

A systematic review of radiation therapy trials in several tumour types was performed by The Swedish Council of Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU). The procedures for evaluation of the scientific literature are described separately (Acta Oncol 2003; 42: 357-365). This synthesis of the literature on radiation therapy for breast cancer is based on data from 29 randomized trials, 6 meta-analyses and 5 retrospective studies. In total, 40 scientific articles are included, involving 41 204 patients. The results were compared with those of a similar overview from 1996 including 285 982 patients. The conclusions reached can be summarized as follows: There is strong evidence for a substantial reduction in locoregional recurrence rate following postmastectomy radiation therapy to the chest wall and the regional nodal areas. There is strong evidence that postmastectomy radiation therapy increases the disease-free survival rate. There are conflicting data regarding the impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy upon overall survival. There is strong evidence that breast cancer specific survival is improved by postmastectomy radiotherapy. There is strong evidence for a decrease in non-breast cancer specific survival after postmastectomy radiotherapy. There is some evidence that overall survival is increased by optimal postmastectomy radiation therapy. There is strong evidence that postmastectomy radiotherapy in addition to surgery and systemic therapy in mainly node-positive patients decreases local recurrence rate and improves survival. There is moderate evidence that the decrease in non-breast cancer specific survival is attributed to cardiovascular disease in irradiated patients. There are conflicting data whether breast conservation surgery plus radiotherapy is comparable to modified radical mastectomy alone in terms of local recurrence rate. There is strong evidence that breast conservation surgery plus radiotherapy is comparable to modified radical mastectomy alone in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival. There is strong evidence that postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery results in a statistically and clinically significant reduction of ipsilateral breast recurrences followed by diminished need for salvage mastectomies. There is strong evidence that the omission of postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery has no impact on overall survival. In one meta-analysis including three randomized studies a survival advantage is demonstrated by Bayesian statistics. There is strong evidence that the addition of a radiation boost after conventional radiotherapy to the tumour bed after breast conservation surgery significantly decreases the risk of ipsilateral breast recurrences but has no impact on overall survival after short follow-up. There is strong evidence for the use of postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery for DCIS (ductal breast cancer in situ). Radiotherapy leads to a clinically and statistically significant reduction of both non-invasive and invasive ipsilateral breast recurrences. There is insufficient evidence to define the optimal integration of systemic adjuvant therapy and postoperative radiotherapy. There are limited data on radiotherapy-related morbidity in breast cancer. No conclusions can be drawn.     

A Systematic Overview of Radiation Therapy Effects in Breast Cancer

A systematic review of radiation therapy trials in several tumour types was performed by The Swedish Council of Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU). The procedures for evaluation of the scientific literature are described separately (Acta Oncol 2003; 42: 357-365). This synthesis of the literature on radiation therapy for breast cancer is based on data from 29 randomized trials, 6 meta-analyses and 5 retrospective studies. In total, 40 scientific articles are included, involving 41 204 patients. The results were compared with those of a similar overview from 1996 including 285 982 patients. The conclusions reached can be summarized as follows: There is strong evidence for a substantial reduction in locoregional recurrence rate following postmastectomy radiation therapy to the chest wall and the regional nodal areas.There is strong evidence that postmastectomy radiation therapy increases the disease-free survival rate.There are conflicting data regarding the impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy upon overall survival.There is strong evidence that breast cancer specific survival is improved by postmastectomy radiotherapy.There is strong evidence for a decrease in non-breast cancer specific survival after postmastectomy radiotherapy.There is some evidence that overall survival is increased by optimal postmastectomy radiation therapy.There is strong evidence that postmastectomy radiotherapy in addition to surgery and systemic therapy in mainly node-positive patients decreases local recurrence rate and improves survival.There is moderate evidence that the decrease in non-breast cancer specific survival is attributed to cardiovascular disease in irradiated patients.There are conflicting data whether breast conservation surgery plus radiotherapy is comparable to modified radical mastectomy alone in terms of local recurrence rate.There is strong evidence that breast conservation surgery plus radiotherapy is comparable to modified radical mastectomy alone in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival.There is strong evidence that postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery results in a statistically and clinically significant reduction of ipsilateral breast recurrences followed by diminished need for salvage mastectomies.There is strong evidence that the omission of postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery has no impact on overall survival. In one meta-analysis including three randomized studies a survival advantage is demonstrated by Bayesian statistics.There is strong evidence that the addition of a radiation boost after conventional radiotherapy to the tumour bed after breast conservation surgery significantly decreases the risk of ipsilateral breast recurrences but has no impact on overall survival after short follow-up.There is strong evidence for the use of postoperative radiotherapy to the breast following breast conservation surgery for DCIS (ductal breast cancer in situ). Radiotherapy leads to a clinically and statistically significant reduction of both non-invasive and invasive ipsilateral breast recurrences.There is insufficient evidence to define the optimal integration of systemic adjuvant therapy and postoperative radiotherapy.There are limited data on radiotherapy-related morbidity in breast cancer. No conclusions can be drawn.     

T4期乳腺癌患者改良根治术后胸壁放疗加量的疗效及预后分析

目的分析T4期乳腺癌患者改良根治术后胸壁放疗加量的疗效。方法回顾分析2000-2016年收治的148例T4期、改良根治术后放疗的乳腺癌患者资料,胸壁放疗加量组57例,不加量组91例。放疗采用常规+胸壁电子线、三维适形+胸壁电子线、调强放疗+胸壁电子线照射,加量组EQD2>50Gy。全组患者均接受新辅助化疗。Kaplan-Meier法生存分析并Logrank检验差异,Cox模型多因素预后分析。结果中位随访时间67.2个月,5年胸壁复发(CWR)、局部区域复发(LRR)、无瘤生存(DFS)、总生存(OS)率分别为9.9%、16.2%、58.0%、71.4%。胸壁放疗加量和不加量的5年CWR、LRR、DFS、OS率分别为14%和7%、18%和15%、57%和58%、82%和65%(P>0.05)。多因素分析显示胸壁加量与否对预后无显著影响(P>0.05)。45例复发高危组患者中放疗加量组似乎有较高的OS率(P=0.058)、DFS率(P=0.084)和较低的LRR率(P=0.059)。结论T4期乳腺癌患者异质性较强,胸壁放疗加量对全组患者无明显获益。对于有脉管瘤栓阳性、pN2-N3、激素受体阴性中2~3个高危因素患者胸壁放疗加量有改善疗效趋势。     

Inflammatory breast cancer. Determination of prognostic factors by univariate and multivariate analysis

Between January 1977 and June 1983, 64 consecutive patients were treated for unilateral inflammatory nonmetastatic breast cancer. Our protocol included three or four courses of induction chemotherapy, then locoregional irradiation therapy with Co-60, followed by maintenance chemotherapy only if induction chemotherapy had proven effective. Eight patients with a residual tumor after radiotherapy underwent a modified radical mastectomy. Actuarial 3-year overall survival for the whole group was 38%, and the median disease-free survival time was 19 months. The effect of 17 factors on overall survival or disease-free survival was analyzed. With univariate analysis, eight factors were found to affect overall survival or disease-free survival: extent of initial erythema, size of initial edema, lymph node involvement, erythema present at the end of initial chemotherapy, erythema present at the end of radiotherapy, tumor size at the end of induction chemotherapy, residual breast tumor at the end of maintenance chemotherapy, and performance of a radical mastectomy. Age at diagnosis, menopausal status, type of chemotherapy, and date of appearance of inflammatory signs did not influence prognosis. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazard model isolated three bad prognosis factors: erythema involving the whole breast at initial diagnosis, erythema present at the end of initial chemotherapy, and lymph node involvement.     

乳腺癌新辅助化疗后改良根治术后放疗开始时间对预后的影响

目的 本研究旨在分析接受新辅助化疗的局部晚期乳腺癌患者改良根治手术时间到放疗开始时间(SRI)对患者预后的影响。方法 回顾性分析全国11家肿瘤中心的1087例接受新辅助化疗和改良根治术后放疗的乳腺癌患者。用Maxstat方法寻找手术到放疗间隔时间对预后影响的最佳界值。采用Cox多因素回归和倾向配比评分(PSM)分析手术距放疗间隔时间对预后的影响。结果 全组中位随访72.9个月,5年无瘤生存(DFS)率和总生存(OS)率分别为68.1%和81.8%。全组患者分为SRI≤18周(917例)和 SRI>18周(170例)两组。多因素分析显示激素受体状态、病理T分期、病理N分期和SRI是DFS影响因素(P<0.001、<0.001、<0.001、0.023)。激素受体状态、病理T分期、病理N分期、内分泌治疗和SRI是OS影响因素(P=0.013、0.006、<0.001、0.013、0.001)。采用PSM均衡两组患者临床病理因素后SRI≤18周患者DFS和OS仍然优于SRI>18周者。结论 新辅助化疗后乳腺癌患者改良根治手术到放疗间隔时间影响预后,患者应尽量在手术后18周内开始放疗。     

Breast-conserving therapy versus modified radical mastectomy in the treatment of early breast cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving therapy has been widely utilized as a treatment option for women with early breast cancer. However, no randomized study comparing modified radical mastectomy and breast-conserving therapy has been conducted in Japan. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-eight Japanese women with early breast cancer enrolled in the Gunma Breast Conserving Therapy Study between 1991 and 1994 were examined to determine whether there is any difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between radical mastectomy and breast-conserving therapy. After informed consent was obtained, a total of 119 patients underwent breast-conserving therapy and 109 underwent mastectomy. RESULTS: Mastectomy was a more frequently utilized treatment than breast-conserving therapy in patients with clinical stage II lesions, older age, larger tumor size or shorter distance between tumor and nipple. The mean follow-up period for all patients was 81 months (median 86 months). There was no significant difference in overall survival or disease-free survival between breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy even after adjusting for the clinical stage of the disease. A multivariate analysis of tumor size, lymph node status, estrogen receptor status and operation method using the Cox proportion hazard model confirmed that only lymph node status was an independent prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: Breast-conserving therapy is comparable to modified radical mastectomy in overall survival and disease-free survival.     

单中心非转移性男性乳腺癌临床病理特征和生存分析

Heʼnan Medical Team has stationed in Lin county(now Linzhou City) of Heʼnan Province for 60 years since November 1959 to carry out prevention and treatment research on high incidence of esophageal cancer. In the past 60 years, three generations of medical experts in Heʼnan Province have made a series of remarkable scientific research achievements in the molecular mechanism and early detection of esophageal cancer, intervention and prevention methods of precancerous lesions, and benefited thousands of patients. Based on the 34-year research of esophageal cancer prevention and treatment in our research group, this paper focuses on the understanding and thinking about the epidemic characteristics, key scientific issues and important research directions of esophageal cancer in China, so as to provide a reference for the prevention and treatment of esophageal cancer. © 2020, CHINA RESEARCH ON PREVENTION AND TREATMENT. All rights reserved.     

放化疗联合生物靶向治疗对乳腺癌早期改良根治术后患者远期生存率的影响

目的 分析放化疗联合生物靶向治疗对乳腺癌早期改良根治术后患者远期生存率的影响.方法 选取乳腺癌早期改良根治术患者86例,将其随机分为对照组与联合组,对照组患者术后行放化疗(多西紫杉醇结合顺铂化疗+三维适形放疗)辅助治疗,联合组在对照组基础上行生物靶向(曲妥珠单抗)治疗,对比两组患者术后并发症发生率及生活质量,比较两组患者术后1年、3年局部复发率、远处转移率、生存率.结果 联合组患者并发症发生率(4.65％)明显低于对照组(44.19％),差异显著(P<0.05);联合组术后生活质量各指标评分均高于对照组,差异明显(P<0.05);两组患者治疗后1年复发率、远处转移率、生存率比较均无明显差异(P>0.05);联合组术后3年远处转移率、复发率均低于对照组,但差异不明显(P>0.05).结论 乳腺癌早期改良根治术后患者实施放化疗联合生物靶向治疗可有效减少并发症提高其生活质量,远期生存率较好,可在临床上推广应用.     

男性乳腺癌125例患者的临床病理特征与生存分析

目的:探讨男性乳腺癌患者的临床病理特征以及治疗和生存情况,并进行预后相关因素的分析.方法:回顾性分析1961年1月-2011年12月共125例男性乳腺癌患者的病历资料和随访资料.采用log-rank检验和COX回归模型分析与男性乳腺癌患者预后相关的因素.结果:125例男性乳腺癌患者的5年总生存率为60.5％,5年无病生存率为54.8％.单因素分析结果显示,是否有恶性肿瘤家族史(P=0.041)、肿瘤大小(P＝0.005)、临床TNM分期(P=0.005)、腋窝淋巴结是否转移(P=0.013)和是否行乳腺癌根治术(P=0.016)是与男性乳腺癌患者总生存率相关的预后因素,而是否有恶性肿瘤家族史(P=0.015)、肿瘤大小(P=0.000)、临床TNM分期(P=0.002)和腋窝淋巴结是否转移(P=0.010)是与男性乳腺癌患者无病生存率相关的预后因素.COX回归模型分析结果显示,肿瘤大小(P=0.045)、腋窝淋巴结是否转移(P=0.026)和是否行乳腺癌根治术(P=0.000)是与总生存率相关的独立预后因素,而肿瘤大小(P=0.010)和是否行乳腺癌根治术(P=0.001)是与无病生存率相关的独立预后因素.结论:肿瘤大小、腋窝淋巴结是否转移和是否行乳腺癌根治术是影响男性乳腺癌患者预后的独立危险因素,早期诊断以及以乳腺癌根治术为主的综合治疗措施是提高男性乳腺癌患者生存率的关键.     

乳腺导管原位癌与导管原位癌伴微浸润的临床比较

目的 分析乳腺导管原位癌(DCIS)及原位癌伴微浸润(DCIS-MI)患者治疗模式变化、临床特征、治疗结果及预后因素。方法 回顾性分析中国医学科学院肿瘤医院1999-2013年收治的866例女性患者资料。DCIS患者631例,DCIS-MI患者235例。用Kaplan-Meier法计算局控(LC)、无瘤生存(DFS)、总生存(OS)率,并Logrank检验和单因素预后分析。结果 DCIS及DCIS-MI两组之间OS、LC及DFS相近(P>0.05)。单因素分析显示Her-2阳性为OS及DFS影响因素,保乳未放疗患者LC和DFS劣于全乳切除术患者。结论 导管原位癌和导管原位癌伴微浸润总体生存结果类似,Her-2阳性为OS及DFS预后不良因素,保乳未放疗患者的LC和DFS劣于全乳切除术。